Everyone's that is saying that Ed Scott handled this with class needs to get a clue. That might be a small part of it, but the bigger picture is that he's avoiding stating anything negative about his employers and other staff. If he did, then he can kiss most future job opportunities goodbye. It was a smart move and I'm sure that it would leave the door open for a future job at Days (or anywhere else in daytime) if Corday/Sony would ever welcome him back after Dena tanks.

tl;dr = He's saving his own ass by being complimentary, rather than berating those who screwed him (ie. Dena).

Anyway, yeah, it was certainly smart from a professional standpoint that Ed spoke decently of Corday, etc., but not everyone does. It's not necessarily a given.

Here's what bothers me IN THIS PARTICULAR SITUATION in that regard. (And I don't think this holds true for EVERY situation like this)

I understand that Ed should not dish dirt, for fear of angering future employers. But I find it hard to believe that after his name was dragged through the mud both by numerous Bell-connected people when he was at Y&R, and by this Higley/WGA situation, it's not like future employers will say "Well, he's got all of this bad press, but in this one interview with Michael Logan he said everything was wonderful, so therefore we should hire him"

Don't get me wrong - I'm an Ed Scott fan, and hope to see his name pop up again sooner, rather than later. But there's "playing the game" and then there's out-and-out sounding silly for not even acknowledging what went down when everybody already knows there's more to it than just what he said.